Not all land slides are rock slides. Some are mostly silt or loamy soil, so are often “mudslides”, e.g. in the Northwest Pacific coast of Canada and the US: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Oso_mudslide
So I would prefer “landslide” as a more general term. - Joseph Eisenberg On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 2:19 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 12:54 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I am not exactly happy about "rock slide" as it seems weird to use it >> where >> danger is primarily about individual rocks dropping, not about full scale >> rock slide. >> >> Personally I would prefer "failing rocks" for warning used by a standard >> road >> sign. >> >> (difference is minor, but if we have luxury of selecting any value...) >> > > Since we do have that luxury, and there is a valid reason for preferring > terminology as actually signed, then we can adopt "hazard=falling_rocks" > (53 usages) and deprecate "hazard=rockfall" (182 usages). These are small > enough numbers that there shouldn't be any harm in choosing the smaller one. > > Can we treat landslide and rock_slide as the same thing? If so, > "hazard=rock_slide" has 394 usages and "hazard=landslide" has 35 usages. > In that case, I would propose to adopt the more popular "rock_slide" and > deprecate "landslide" as duplicate. > > Would this address the concerns? > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
